Gait and Balance Outcome Measures Are Responsive in Severely Impaired Individuals Undergoing Inpatient Stroke Rehabilitation.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether gait and balance outcome measures in patients with severe gait and balance impairments at admission to inpatient rehabilitation provided additional and meaningful information beyond customary measures. Specifically, this study investigated whether individuals who obtained low scores at admission exhibited improvements that exceeded the established minimal detectable change during inpatient rehabilitation. We also investigated whether gait outcomes would capture changes in function not identified by customary measures. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of a knowledge translation project aimed at increasing the systematic collection of these outcome measures in a poststroke cohort. SETTING: Subacute inpatient rehabilitation facility. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals<2 months poststroke (N=157) with 34-43 with severe deficits including Berg Balance Scale≤5, 10-meter walk test=0 m/s, or 6-minute walk test=0 m. INTERVENTION: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Berg Balance Scale, 10-meter walk test, 6-minute walk test. RESULTS: After 1 week of rehabilitation, 41%-53% of severely impaired individuals had changes above minimal detectable changes in gait and balance outcomes, which increased to 68%-84% at discharge. Across the entire cohort, FIM locomotion scores failed to identify changes in gait function for 35% of participants after 1 week of rehabilitation. CONCLUSIONS: Routine assessment of gait and balance outcome measures in patients with severe deficits early poststroke may be beneficial. These measures were responsive after 1 week of rehabilitation and detected changes not captured by customary measures. Routine use of a standardized gait and balance assessments may provide clinicians with important information to guide clinical decision making.

Commentary on the Challenges and Benefits of Implementing Standardized Outcome Measures.

The Institute of Medicine (now the National Academy of Medicine) has proposed a Learning Heath system (LHS) as a model to improve health care. A LHS focuses on capturing data from the clinical encounter and applying those data to improve practice. The process can be described as an iterative learning cycle composed of 3 areas: performance to data, data to knowledge, and knowledge to performance or often knowledge translation. Adoption of new knowledge in medicine is notoriously slow, and the relatively new field of knowledge translation is systematically examining the critical success factors. In this issue of the Archives, Moore reports a knowledge translation project in a key aspect of rehabilitation: implementing standardized outcome measures. We report on the challenges and benefits of that project from a practical perspective and identify the critical success ingredient, leadership for implementation, which was composed of 3 key behaviors: setting clear expectations, engaging stakeholders, and providing support. Furthermore, the additional benefits, challenges, and costs are addressed.

Applying the Knowledge-to-Action Framework to Implement Gait and Balance Assessments in Inpatient Stroke Rehabilitation.

OBJECTIVES: The overall objectives of this project were to implement and sustain use of a gait assessment battery (GAB) that included the Berg Balance Scale, 10-meter walk test, and 6-minute walk test during inpatient stroke rehabilitation. The study objective was to assess the effect of the study intervention on clinician adherence to the recommendations and its effect on clinician perceptions and the organization. DESIGN: Pre- and post-training intervention study. SETTING: Subacute inpatient rehabilitation facility. PARTICIPANTS: Physical therapists (N=6) and physical therapist assistants (N=2). INTERVENTION: The intervention comprised a bundle of activities, including codeveloping and executing the plan with clinicians and leaders. The multicomponent implementation plan was based on the Knowledge-to-Action Framework and included implementation facilitation, implementation leadership, and a bundle of knowledge translation interventions that targeted barriers. Implementation was an iterative process in which results from one implementation phase informed planning of the next phase. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Clinician administration adherence, surveys of perceptions, and organizational outcomes. RESULTS: Initial adherence to the GAB was 46% and increased to more than 85% after 6 months. These adherence levels remained consistent 48 months after implementation. Clinician perceptions of measure use were initially high (>63%), with significant improvements in knowledge and use of one measure after implementation. CONCLUSIONS: We successfully implemented the assessment battery with high levels of adherence to recommendations, likely because of using the bundle of knowledge translation activities, facilitation, and use of a framework to codevelop the plan. These changes in practice were sustainable, as determined by a 4-year follow-up.